So this week's staff debate is this: Are you buying or are you selling Tierney's quote: "The rules of lacrosse have got to change."

John Jiloty

I’m buying. The more prominent figures in the game to make statements like these, the more likely something is to happen for the 2013 season. There was a lot of experimentation last fall, so that was a good sign. People have admitted that something needs to be done, which is the first step. The second is trying out solutions. So that’s a pretty rapid evolution of the process. No rule changes could be made for this 2012 season, so the Rules Committee will reconvene this summer. And I’d be surprised if something fairly substantial didn’t go through for the 2013 season.

Ty Xanders

Buying. I wouldn't say lacrosse is losing fans, but it will certainly turn people off if rules aren't put into place for spring of 2013. I think I speak for everybody when I say the sport is best played fast and lacrosse needs to get back to being accurately called the "fastest sport on two feet." I do think that Division III has become more attractive than D1 at this point; I'd much rather see a Salisbury-Stevenson game than Hopkins-Maryland. Division I is where the problem lies and I think the second half of the Denver game this past weekend opened some eyes and mouthes.

There's no doubt in my mind that the rules need to be changed. The 60-second shot clock worked very well for the UNC-Ohio State scrimmage and would be the best way to solve the pace of play issue.

Geoff Shannon

Selling: In the last decade or so the game has pushed to achieve parity at the Division I level. Roster depth, though, plays a huge part in the teams that have won championships. Virginia can lose major offensive pieces, but since they have high school All-Americans riding pine, they can make those adjustments and still win. Taking the air out of the ball and establishing tight defenses has been a big way in which mid-tier teams with less depth have matched powerhouses. Also, lacrosse’s base of talent is growing, but, and DI coaches know this, the pool of Blue Chip, program-changing recruits is the same it’s been for a while. The current rules, coupled with the current player talent pool, create program opportunity. By playing within the current rules, Ohio State, a solid mid-tier program with potential, is 3-0, scoring 36 goals in three games. How can you not like that?

Terry Foy

I’m buying if I can tweak the statement to read “The rules of lacrosse have got to change [if the game’s actually going to speed up].” After all the talk this offseason about how much coaches hate stalling and how they’re going to use two-way middies, I don’t think there’s been a drastic change (granted, I’m in the minority of thinking the game’s perfectly fast and exciting, if not as fast as it was 20 years ago.

But there’s no consensus on what the goal of changing the rules actually is. “Making the game more exciting?” That’s so subjective that it’s a terrible goal. I’m selling that the rules need to be changed until there’s conventional wisdom to fill in “so that...” at the end of that statement.

Casey Vock

I’m not wholeheartedly buying this statement, at least not yet. I’ve gone back and forth in my own mind about the idea of a shot clock, and I agree with the idea presented by other IL staffers that in order to increase the pace of the game, a shot clock might be necessary. But I think we have to be careful to put too much weight on the perspective of a coach who has just lost at the hand of a team employing stall ball in some shape or form — even if it’s John Desko or Bill Tierney. As we all know, Tierney has used the slow-down game to his advantage in the past. The game is as exhilarating to me as it was more than 15 years ago. I want everyone to feel the same way about the sport, but I’m just still not convinced that a shot clock is the way to achieve that. To me, the 5-4 chess matches can be as intense as the 16-15 shootouts.

Zach Babo

I am buying that the sport could use a few rule changes, but I still think the shot clock is a horrible idea that will just lead to a much bigger mess. Make the span of the season shorter but play as many games so you can’t game plan as much and must play on a short turn around. Cut the box off at GLE, or pinch it in on all sides, so when a stall warning is called, there is literally no space to go run and hide. Outlaw zone defenses. Make every whistle a quick restart.

The NCAA could have done a lot for this debate if the stick changes they aggravated every manufacturer with weren’t so poorly thought out, unilateral, tepid and pointless. As Tierney said, there will be unintended consequences to a shot clock. Knee jerk reactions are good for no one.